[Old York]

helene_t, on Dec 11 2009, 04:02 PM, said:

Oh you mean why short club is allowed at EBU level 3 while short spade isn't?

No, not at all. I have no idea why this conversation has veered off course, sorry again

Someone in his ivory tower has decided that a 1♣ opening bid is to be treated as natural with ♣xx, but has also decided that a 1♠ response with ♠xx is a psyche
Just seemed odd to me, that's all.

As an Acol player, all natural bids in any suit show a 4+ card suit. The first time I encountered a 1♣ bid (unalerted) with ♣xx , it was completely alien to me
I fully understand that it is the only "practical" bid if the agreement is 5 card majors with 4 card diamonds (5542)

Tony

[helene_t]

I don't understand what you mean, Tony.

People don't usually call short minor suit openings "natural", and I am not aware of any laws or regulations that treat them as such, other than the oddity in Shanghai when for some reason the organizers chose to make peculiar rules.

Whether opening one of a suit on xx is a psyche or not depends on whether your agreements allow you to do so. If not, it may be psyche. It really doesn't matter whether it's clubs or spades.

Yes, 1♣ on 3+ is usually called "natural" although I wouldn't give that explanation if playing in the UK where people would expect 4+. OTOH everyone bids
1♠-2♣*
on 3433, even in Acol-land.

[1eyedjack]

I should be surprised if anyone categorises the 2H bid as a psych. By definition a psych is "a deliberate and gross misstatement of honor strength or suit length". It is not a misstatement of suit length. It is a misstatement of strength. Possibly some may argue over whether that misstatement is gross, but I very much doubt that it would be ruled as deliberate. Well, the bid was deliberate but the misstatement I think not.

[peachy]

1eyedjack, on Dec 11 2009, 01:07 PM, said:

I should be surprised if anyone categorises the 2H bid as a psych. By definition a psych is "a deliberate and gross misstatement of honor strength or suit length". It is not a misstatement of suit length. It is a misstatement of strength. Possibly some may argue over whether that misstatement is gross, but I very much doubt that it would be ruled as deliberate. Well, the bid was deliberate but the misstatement I think not.

The "gross and deliberate misstatement" part is judged "as compared to their partnership agreement". In the posted case, it is quite possible that the pair had very little bridge experience and no common sense and the 2H bid was in accordance with their agreements (if they even had any to speak of). Many novices do not understand the concept of reverse, they just bid the suits they have.

I am fairly certain that the 2H bidder had no intention whatsoever to make a misstatement, or to psych.

[bluejak]

Old York, on Dec 11 2009, 03:54 PM, said:

But, from the regulator's perspective, what possible difference is there between ♣xx and ♠xx ? [Hypothetical question]

You are confusing what is allowed, and what is shown. The regulators tend to follow general wishes in what they allow. Players tend to want to bid shorter minors.

But when considering psyches it is not relevant what is permitted: it is what the pair discloses as their systemic understandings compared to what they have. If a 1♣ opening shows 2+ that is legal, and bidding it on xx is normal enough. But players do not want to open 1♠ on xx and that is usually not permitted.

If a 1♠ response shows 4+ and someone bids it on xx they have psyched or misbid, dependent on intent.

[bluejak]

Old York, on Dec 11 2009, 05:18 PM, said:

Someone in his ivory tower has decided that a 1♣ opening bid is to be treated as natural with ♣xx, but has also decided that a 1♠ response with ♠xx is a psyche
Just seemed odd to me, that's all.

No-one in their ivory tower decided any such thing. A psyche is something differs from a pair's agreements. If a pair plays a 1♠ response as showing xx [legal in the EBU] and disclose it then bidding it is not a psyche. The reason it is a psyche 99.9% of the time is that is not what the pair play. Nothing to do with double standards: it is the players that decide what their system is, not the regulators.

Actually, no-one has decided an opening of 1♣ on xx is natural: it isn't, it is artificial. But it is permitted, it is legal.

[bluejak]

Old York, on Dec 10 2009, 02:57 PM, said:

A psych is a "gross distortion of the natural meaning of a bid".

No, it is not. It is a gross distortion of the pair's agreements as to the meaning of the call.